Disambiguation is required whenever, for a given word or phrase on which a reader might search, there is more than one existing Wikipedia article to which that word or phrase might be expected to lead. In this situation there must be a way for the reader to navigate quickly from the page that first appears to any of the other possible desired articles.

There are three principal disambiguation scenarios, of which the following are examples:

The page at Joker is a disambiguation page, leading to all the alternative uses of "Joker".

If the primary meaning of a term proposed for disambiguation is a broad concept or type of thing that is capable of being described in an article, and a substantial portion of the links asserted to be ambiguous are instances or examples of that concept or type, then the page located at that title should be an article describing the broad concept, and not a disambiguation page. Where the primary topic of a term is a general topic that can be divided into subtopics, such as chronologically (e.g., History of France) or geographically (e.g., Rugby union in the British Isles), the unqualified title should contain an article about the general topic rather than a disambiguation page. A disambiguation page should not be created just because it is difficult to write an article on a topic that is broad, vague, abstract, or highly conceptual. Where there are additional meanings that are not instances or examples of a "Foo" primary concept or type, those should be included on a "Foo (disambiguation)" page.

For example:

Particle (previously a disambiguation page) is a broad and abstract concept used to address many different ideas in physics, generally relating to small units from which larger things are composed. Although there are many different kinds of particles at levels ranging from the subatomic to the macroscopic, the broad concept is properly susceptible to explanation in an article. Other meanings, such as Particle (band), are presented at Particle (disambiguation).

A Supreme court, National Trust, or Finance minister is each a kind of entity occurring in multiple countries and possibly in other political entities, and serving the same purpose in each. Rather than having disambiguation pages at these titles linking to existing articles on these entities by nation, each should contain an article describing in general terms what the concept is, and how the different examples of this concept relate to each other.

Football may refer to one of a number of team sports which all involve, to varying degrees, kicking a ball with the foot. Although the word "football" can apply to whichever form of football is the most popular in the regional context in which the word appears, all of these variations share some common elements and can be traced to a common origin. Thus, the history and development of the general concept of football can be explained in its own article.

Many definitions of triangle center are used in Euclidean geometry, which coincide only in the special case of equilateral triangles. The article lists a dozen of these, and also gives a validity criterion applicable to various definitions of "center".

In writing articles on these subjects, it is useful to directly address the scope of the term, and the history of how the concept has developed. Each of the examples of the concept or type of thing should be included at some point in the article, possibly in a list, so that no information is lost from what would have been presented in the disambiguation page format. Consider using summary style to incorporate information about the subtopics into the main article.

Pages needing to be expanded to describe the concept may be tagged with {{dabconcept}}.

Сделайте любимым символичный подарок к Новому 2015 Году! Подарите им мягкую, пушистую Овечку с Секретом внутри! Although a word, name or phrase may refer to more than one topic, it is sometimes the case that one of these topics is the primary topic. This is the topic to which the term should lead, serving as the title of (or a redirect to) the relevant article. If there is no primary topic, the term should be the title of a disambiguation page (or should redirect to a disambiguation page on which more than one term is disambiguated). The primary topic might be a broad-concept article, as mentioned above.

There is no single criterion for defining a primary topic. However, there are two major aspects that are commonly discussed in connection with primary topics:

A topic is primary for a term, with respect to usage, if it is highly likely—much more likely than any other topic, and more likely than all the other topics combined—to be the topic sought when a reader searches for that term.

A topic is primary for a term, with respect to long-term significance, if it has substantially greater enduring notability and educational value than any other topic associated with that term.

In many cases, a topic that is primary with respect to usage is also primary with respect to long-term significance. In many other cases, only one sense of primacy is relevant. In a few cases, there is some conflict between a topic of primary usage and one of primary long-term significance. In such a case, consensus determines which article, if either, is the primary topic.

There are no absolute rules for determining whether a primary topic exists and what it is; decisions are made by discussion among editors, often as a result of a requested move. Tools that may help to support the determination of a primary topic in a discussion (but are not considered absolute determining factors) include:

The title of the primary topic article may be different from the ambiguous term. This may happen when the topic is primary for more than one term, when the article covers a wider topical scope, or when it is titled differently according to the naming conventions. When this is the case, the term should redirect to the article (or a section of it). The fact that an article has a different title is not a factor in determining whether a topic is primary. For example:

For rules about naming disambiguation pages and combining similar terms on a single page, see Disambiguation pages.

As discussed above, if an ambiguous term has no primary topic, then that term needs to lead to a disambiguation page. In other words, where no topic is primary, the disambiguation page is placed at the base name.

If there is a primary topic, then the question arises whether to create a disambiguation page, or merely to link to all the other meanings from a hatnote on the primary topic article.

If there are only two topics to which a given title might refer, and one is the primary topic, then a disambiguation page is not needed—it is sufficient to use a hatnote on the primary topic article, pointing to the other article. (This means that readers looking for the second topic are spared the extra navigational step of going through the disambiguation page.) If there are two or three other topics, it is still possible to use a hatnote which lists the other topics explicitly, but if this would require too much text (roughly, if the hatnote would extend well over one line on a standard page), then it is better to create a disambiguation page and refer only to that.

If a disambiguation page is needed, but one of the other topics is of particular interest, then it may be appropriate to link to it explicitly as well as linking to the disambiguation page. For example, Inflation is about the primary topic—a rise in prices—and a hatnote links to Inflation (cosmology) as well as Inflation (disambiguation).

If a disambiguation page does not appear to be needed because there are only two articles with the same title (one of them a primary topic), but there could reasonably be other topics ambiguous with the title on Wikipedia now or in the future, the {{Consider disambiguation}} hatnote should be used to link to the disambiguation page. At the same time, the {{Only-two-dabs}} template should be added to the top of the disambiguation page, which will inform users that the page has only two ambiguous terms, and may be deleted if, after a period of time to allow readers and editors the opportunity to expand the disambiguation page, additional disambiguating terms are not found. The {{Only-two-dabs}} template will also list the article in Ron:Disambiguation pages containing one non-primary topic, allowing other editors to locate these pages and help in expanding them.

For disambiguating specific topic pages by using an unambiguous article title, several options are available:

Natural disambiguation. When there is another term (such as Apartment instead of Flat) or more complete name (such as English language instead of English) that is unambiguous, commonly used in English, and equally clear, that term may be used.

If there are several possible choices for parenthetical disambiguation, use the same disambiguating phrase already commonly used for other topics within the same class and context, if any. Otherwise, choose whichever is simpler. For example, use "(mythology)" rather than "(mythological figure)".

If there is a choice between using natural and parenthetical disambiguation, such as Mathematical analysis and Analysis (mathematics), there is no hard rule about which is preferred. Both may be created, with one redirecting to the other. The choice between them is made by consensus, taking into account general naming criteria (e.g., consistency with the pattern used for similar articles).

Naming conventions applicable to certain subject areas are listed in the box to the right; these often contain detailed guidance about how to disambiguate. In particular, for articles about people, see the Disambiguating section in the people naming convention.

To conform to the naming conventions, the phrase in parentheses should be treated just as any other word in a title: normally lowercase, unless it is a proper noun (like a book title) that would appear capitalized even in running text.

Users searching for what turns out to be an ambiguous term may not reach the article they expected. Therefore any article with an ambiguous title should contain helpful links to alternative Wikipedia articles or disambiguation pages, placed at the top of the article using one or more of the templates shown below.

Disambiguation hatnotes are not article content—they are associated with the title, rather than any article topic content.

Most hatnote templates generate links automatically, so double square brackets are not normally used within the templates. In some cases there are multiple templates available, one including and another omitting information about the topic of the article. The shorter hatnote may be chosen if omitting the information is not likely to confuse the reader.

On a primary topic page for a term that has one secondary topic only (no disambiguation page):

There is not always a need to add disambiguation links to a page whose name already clearly distinguishes itself from the generic term. However, for some topics this is a good idea. For example, Treaty of Paris (1796) should include a hatnote point to the disambiguation page Treaty of Paris (disambiguation), since many users might not know that there is more than one treaty with this name, and we can't predict what external search engines will link to. In other cases, such a hatnote is not necessary. For example, Solaris (1972 film) is clearly about one specific movie and not about any of the many other meanings of "Solaris", and most users will know to type Solaris in the search box to find other topics.

As noted above, disambiguation links should be placed at the top of an article, where they are most visible. For alternatives that are related to the article but are not a source of ambiguity, the "See also" section at the end of the article is more appropriate.

Do not use piping to change the title of disambiguation entry links. Showing the actual linked entry title avoids confusion. (Piping may be used for formatting or technical reasons; see the Manual of Style exceptions.)

Consolidate multiple disambiguation links into as few dablink hatnotes as possible.

See Wikipedia:Hatnote for other guidelines on the proper use of disambiguation links.

Variant forms of names. For example, Fred Smith also includes persons named Frederick Smith.

Terms which differ by the presence or absence of an article (i.e., "a", "an", or "the" in English). For example, Cure (disambiguation) also contains instances of The Cure.

Editorial judgement should be used in deciding whether to combine terms in the ways described above. If a combined disambiguation page would be inconveniently long, it may be better to split the disambiguation page into separate pages.

When a combined disambiguation page is used, redirects to it (or hatnotes, as appropriate) should be set up from all the terms involved.

The title of a disambiguation page is the ambiguous term itself, provided there is no primary topic for that term. If there is a primary topic, then the tag "(disambiguation)" is added to the name of the disambiguation page, as in Jupiter (disambiguation).

When a disambiguation page combines several similar terms, one of them must be selected as the title for the page (with the "(disambiguation)" tag added if a primary topic exists for that term); the choice should be made in line with the following principles:

When no word can be formed, all capitals is preferred. For example, the disambiguation page for "ddb" is DDB (disambiguation), not "Ddb".

English spelling is preferred to that of non-English languages.

Singulars are preferred to plurals.

The simplest form of the term is preferred to those containing punctuation, diacritics and articles; for example SA is preferred to S.A., and Shadow (disambiguation) is preferred to The Shadow (disambiguation).

The spelling that reflects the majority of items on the page is preferred to less common alternatives.

In addition, when a disambiguation page exists at the ambiguous term, there should also be a redirect to it from the "(disambiguation)" title; in other words, if "Term ABC" is a disambiguation page, a redirect from "Term ABC (disambiguation)" should be created if it does not already exist. This type of redirect is used to indicate any intentional links to the disambiguation page, to distinguish them from accidental or erroneous incoming links that should be disambiguated to the appropriate article.

A disambiguation page is not a list of dictionary definitions. A short description of the common general meaning of a word can be appropriate for helping the reader determine context. Otherwise, there are templates for linking the reader to Wiktionary, the wiki dictionary; see Template:Wiktionary.

A disambiguation page is not a search index. Do not add a link that merely contains part of the page title, or a link that includes the page title in a longer proper name, where there is no significant risk of confusion or reference. For example, Baltimore Zoo is not included at Zoo (disambiguation) because people outside Baltimore would not readily identify it as the "Zoo", and including all zoos in the world in the disambiguation page is impractical. Add a link only if the article's subject (or the relevant subtopic thereof) could plausibly be referred to by essentially the same name as the disambiguated term in a sufficiently generic context—regardless of the article's title. For instance, the Mississippi River article could not feasibly be titled Mississippi, since that name is used by the U.S. state article, but it is included at Mississippi (disambiguation) because its subject is often called "the Mississippi". Place names are often divided between a specific and generic part: "North Carolina" (where "Carolina" is the specific, and "North" the generic part). Other common generics are compass points, upper/lower, old/new, big/small, etc. It is entirely proper to include such place names in disambiguation pages with the specific title (North Carolina is properly listed at Carolina (disambiguation)); but only exceptionally in the generic title (we don't expect to see North Carolina in North (disambiguation), just as we don't expect to see Mississippi River in River (disambiguation)).

Do not add articles to abbreviation or acronym disambiguation pages unless the target article defines the acronym or abbreviation. If an abbreviation is notable and verifiable, but not mentioned on the target article, consider adding it to the target article and then adding the entry to the disambiguation page. In particular, don't include people and other things simply because of their initials, unless those initials have been widely used. John Fitzgerald Kennedy is widely known as JFK, and so it is included; however, Marilyn Monroe was never commonly known as "MM", nor was A. A. Milne known as "AA" (or "AAM").

Don't include external links, either as entries or in descriptions. Disambiguation pages disambiguate Wikipedia articles, not the World Wide Web. To note URLs that might be helpful in the future, include them on the talk page. An exception is linking to Wiktionary for the dictionary definition of the disambiguated topic.

If an article has been moved to make way for the disambiguation page, use the What links here list of the moved page to access the redirect page created by the move, and replace that redirect page with the new disambiguation page.

A double disambiguation is a link to a disambiguation page from another disambiguation page. This kind of disambiguation is typically more specific than one with a simplified name. This kind of disambiguation is relatively rare on Wikipedia.

For example, Montgomery is a disambiguation page that includes a link to Montgomery County, a secondary disambiguation page. Because the intended target page is also a disambiguation page, the link is to "Montgomery County (disambiguation)" rather than directly to "Montgomery County", so the page will not show up as an error needing to be fixed. See WP:INTDABLINK for further information on creating intentional links to disambiguation pages.

When a more specific title is still ambiguous, but not enough so to call for double disambiguation, it should redirect back to the main disambiguation page (or a section of it). This aids navigation, and helps editors to avoid creating new articles under the ambiguous title by accident.

Pure disambiguation pages should contain interlanguage links only where a similar problem of disambiguation exists in the target language; that is, they should refer to another disambiguation page, not to one of the many meanings from the list.

A code of honor for creating disambiguation pages is to fix all resulting mis-directed links.

Before moving an article to a qualified name (in order to create a disambiguation page at the base name, to move an existing disambiguation page to that name, or to redirect that name to a disambiguation page), click on What links here to find all of the incoming links. Repair all of those incoming links to use the new article name.

When repairing a link, use pipe syntax so that the link does not show the new qualifier. For example, when renaming Topic Name to Topic Name (qualifier), [[Topic Name (qualifier)|Topic Name]] will render as Topic Name just like the original.

A shorter alternative is to use empty pipe syntax, also known as the pipe trick. This allows editors to leave out the piped alternative when editing. For example, typing "[[Topic Name (qualifier)|]]" will automatically produce "[[Topic Name (qualifier)|Topic Name]]". Read Help:Pipe trick for more information.

Ambiguous links are periodically checked and repaired, but even if some ambiguous links remain, one of the primary reasons for making a disambiguation page is so that following such links will still be useful to the reader.

With few exceptions, creating links to disambiguation pages is erroneous. Links should instead point to a relevant article. The purpose of a disambiguation page is to give a user who has typed an ambiguous term into the search box a list of articles that are likely to be what he or she is looking for. Disambiguation pages are not articles and so should not be tagged as orphans per the Orphan criteria.

When to link to a disambiguation page

The exceptions, when an intentional link to a disambiguation page is appropriate, are:

Where the context of an article indicates that it is discussing the ambiguity of the term itself: for example, the article HAL 9000 describes a scene where a character observes that the word "Phoenix" has many meanings, and links to the disambiguation page to provide those meanings. A link to Wiktionary might also suffice to provide those meanings.

To link to a disambiguation page (rather than to a page whose topic is a specific meaning), link to the title that includes the text "(disambiguation)", even if that is a redirect—for example, link to the redirect America (disambiguation) rather than the target page at "America". (If the redirect does not yet exist, create it and tag it with {{R to disambiguation page}}.) This helps distinguish accidental links to the disambiguation page from intentional ones. (For use in navboxes, see the {{D'}} template.) There is nothing wrong with linking to a redirect instead of linking directly to the disambiguation page; redirects are cheap and are basically transparent to the reader.

Redirects to disambiguation pages

Valid causes for redirecting to a disambiguation page include:

Redirects from misspellings: Britian redirects to the "Britain" disambiguation page.

Redirects from alternative spellings if separate disambiguation pages are not warranted: Türk redirects to the "Turk" disambiguation page.

Redirects from variations in capitalisation, word separation, or punctuation, if separate disambiguation pages are not warranted: Bullet Proof redirects to "Bulletproof (disambiguation)".

The rule about linking through a "(disambiguation)" redirect does not apply to redirects to disambiguation pages: do not create a double redirect, but make a redirect to the disambiguation page directly (thus Bill Cox, a redirect from an alternative name, redirects to the disambiguation page and does not go through the redirect William Cox (disambiguation)).

Disambiguation pages are not articles and should not be categorized as such. Article categories should lead readers to relevant articles; disambiguation pages should be placed in disambiguation categories only. Some categories are automatically provided by use of the {{disambiguation}} template and parameters (geo, surname, etc.). Hidden categories may appear due to maintenance or other tags and templates, but other explicit categories (such as Category:Mountains of Fooland) should not be used on disambiguation pages. When a disambiguation page includes a list of name-holders (in cases where the separate anthroponymy list article has not yet been created), explicit categories such as Category:Fooish surnames are acceptable on the disambiguation page until the anthroponymy article is split from the disambiguation page.

A set index article is not a disambiguation page: A disambiguation page is a list of different types of things that share the same (or similar) name. A set index need not follow the formatting rules for disambiguation pages; however many do by convention. A set index article is meant for information as well as navigation: just like a normal list article, it can have metadata and extra information about each entry. It may contain redlinks to help editors create articles on notable entries.

Fundamentally, a set index article is a type of list article. The criteria for creating, adding to, or deleting a set index article should be the same as for a stand-alone list. The style of a set index article should follow the style guidelines at Wikipedia:Stand-alone lists. A set index article can be tagged with {{Set index article}}.

Sometimes there will be a disambiguation page and a set index article for the same term. If the disambiguation page carries the name of the term (as with Signal Mountain), then the set index article should be named "List of XXXs named YYY" (as in List of peaks named Signal Mountain). Alternatively, if the set index article is considered the primary topic, it may be named with just the term itself, the disambiguation page being called "YYY (disambiguation)".